4 ms·

Were these the same people who told us the glaciers would be melted and the Maldives under water by 2000? How narcissistic do you have to be to believe the wor

by fwungy 4y ago

Were these the same people who told us the glaciers would be melted and the Maldives under water by 2000? How narcissistic do you have to be to believe the world is going to end in your little eye blink of a lifetime? Look, the West can go carbon negative, but it makes no difference at all if China and India just use the West's carbon virtue to increase their own carbon consumption (that the West isn't using). We really should be thinking about next generation nuclear and mitigation as first tier strategies and not attempting to remake human nature in a few generations time.

ajsnigrutin 4y ago
> We really should be thinking about next generation nuclear and mitigation as first tier strategies and not attempting to remake human nature in a few generations time. It's funny, because a lot of "greens" are asking for less carbon-* or carbon neutral stuff, but are immediately against anything nuclear, even though it's the only option we have, to generate enough power, even on windless nights. There are even comics made about this: https://i.redd.it/x1saxijbtj7a1.png https://i.redd.it/x1saxijbtj7a1.png
- sunbum 4y ago
  Because the "greens" of the cold war are the same people today. Totally yes that must entirely be it!
- kzrdude 4y ago
  I think greens are not alone in this - our whole culture has been part of demonizing nuclear power. Non-activist people accepted avoiding nuclear as a good compromise since it was a touchy subject. The luxury of considering no externalities (i.e allowing fossil fuel emissions) enabled this.
frereubu 4y ago
I take your point, but this isn't a zero-sum game, as has been shown by the plummeting cost of solar energy. If enough countries move towards renewable enegy (and in the mid-term nuclear, agreed) it will become cheap enough that other will adopt it for purely economic reasons.
Sankozi 4y ago
This is pure FUD. > Were these the same people who told us the glaciers would be melted and the Maldives under water by 2000? Were they? Please tell us. > How narcissistic do you have to be to believe the world is going to end in your little eye blink of a lifetime? Who says that? Where in the article have you read something like that? > Look, the West can go carbon negative, but it makes no difference at all if China and India just use the West's carbon virtue to increase their own carbon consumption (that the West isn't using). India emissions per capita are very low. China emissions per capita (7.61T) are lower than average of developed nations (US is almost two times bigger - 14.6T). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?contextual=similar&locations=CN&most_recent_value_desc=true https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?contextu...
- fwungy 4y ago
  The populations are huge and their consumption is going up. If fossil fuels get cheaper because the West isn't buying them the East will happily consume them.
- iakov 4y ago
  The FUD is spread by climate activists so often that nobody takes them seriously anymore. Look, this [0] is the latest example - I've heard about it from my friends. They were mocking the poster child of climate change activists and her doom-and-gloom prophecies that she promptly deleted once it became clear that the permanent ice is still there, and that humanity is not, in fact, extinct. Of course now it's an "imprecise paraphrase" and not meant to be taken at face value, because even to a layman the FUD is clearly visible. All this screaming, kicking and general attentionwhoring did nothing positive to the climate change topic. My friends are not conspiracy nuts or some low-life crazies, they're normal people with uni degrees working tech jobs and living middle-class lives. They have heard so much about their carbon footprint, about the inevitable climate catastrophe the upcoming years that is getting postponed every time, that they are just tired of that. There is no constructive solution from our elected leaders, just endless fear-mongering, finger-pointing and uncertain predictions. [0] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/greta-thunberg-deleted-2018-tweet-on-humanity/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/greta-thunberg-deleted-201...
sprucevoid 4y ago
> Were these the same people who ... No. The article reports on scientific evidence. Are you a scientist doing scientific work on the climate impact of the meat industry or a scientist studying meat industry lobbying? If no then on what evidence do you base your scepticism about what the linked article says?

by fwungy 4y ago

ajsnigrutin 4y ago

> We really should be thinking about next generation nuclear and mitigation as first tier strategies and not attempting to remake human nature in a few generations time. It's funny, because a lot of "greens" are asking for less carbon-* or carbon neutral stuff, but are immediately against anything nuclear, even though it's the only option we have, to generate enough power, even on windless nights. There are even comics made about this: https://i.redd.it/x1saxijbtj7a1.png https://i.redd.it/x1saxijbtj7a1.png

sunbum 4y ago
Because the "greens" of the cold war are the same people today. Totally yes that must entirely be it!
kzrdude 4y ago
I think greens are not alone in this - our whole culture has been part of demonizing nuclear power. Non-activist people accepted avoiding nuclear as a good compromise since it was a touchy subject. The luxury of considering no externalities (i.e allowing fossil fuel emissions) enabled this.

frereubu 4y ago

I take your point, but this isn't a zero-sum game, as has been shown by the plummeting cost of solar energy. If enough countries move towards renewable enegy (and in the mid-term nuclear, agreed) it will become cheap enough that other will adopt it for purely economic reasons.

Sankozi 4y ago

This is pure FUD. > Were these the same people who told us the glaciers would be melted and the Maldives under water by 2000? Were they? Please tell us. > How narcissistic do you have to be to believe the world is going to end in your little eye blink of a lifetime? Who says that? Where in the article have you read something like that? > Look, the West can go carbon negative, but it makes no difference at all if China and India just use the West's carbon virtue to increase their own carbon consumption (that the West isn't using). India emissions per capita are very low. China emissions per capita (7.61T) are lower than average of developed nations (US is almost two times bigger - 14.6T). https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?contextual=similar&locations=CN&most_recent_value_desc=true https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PC?contextu...

fwungy 4y ago
The populations are huge and their consumption is going up. If fossil fuels get cheaper because the West isn't buying them the East will happily consume them.
iakov 4y ago
The FUD is spread by climate activists so often that nobody takes them seriously anymore. Look, this [0] is the latest example - I've heard about it from my friends. They were mocking the poster child of climate change activists and her doom-and-gloom prophecies that she promptly deleted once it became clear that the permanent ice is still there, and that humanity is not, in fact, extinct. Of course now it's an "imprecise paraphrase" and not meant to be taken at face value, because even to a layman the FUD is clearly visible. All this screaming, kicking and general attentionwhoring did nothing positive to the climate change topic. My friends are not conspiracy nuts or some low-life crazies, they're normal people with uni degrees working tech jobs and living middle-class lives. They have heard so much about their carbon footprint, about the inevitable climate catastrophe the upcoming years that is getting postponed every time, that they are just tired of that. There is no constructive solution from our elected leaders, just endless fear-mongering, finger-pointing and uncertain predictions. [0] https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/greta-thunberg-deleted-2018-tweet-on-humanity/ https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/greta-thunberg-deleted-201...

sprucevoid 4y ago

> Were these the same people who ... No. The article reports on scientific evidence. Are you a scientist doing scientific work on the climate impact of the meat industry or a scientist studying meat industry lobbying? If no then on what evidence do you base your scepticism about what the linked article says?